Wednesday, 13 May 2009
Afghanistan: The Land of Destruction and Suffering
Afghanistan has been a land of destruction and suffering for years, and a similar situation will last years to come. There have been several devastations which have played a role in the suffering of the people in Afghanistan. Due to lack of any infrastructure for average life conditions, people had to support their survival by planting opium which is the primary source of heroin.
Afghanistan had experienced numerous foreign military invasions as well as internal conflicts. Noticeably the 1979 Soviet invasion and internal conflicts in the aftermath of the Russian military pulling out of the country have played a major role in the current turmoil in Afghanistan.
However, much of the blame for the current situation in the country should be put on the shoulders of different parties, all of which have had interests in the country. First of all, the opposition groups, which fought against the Russian invasion side by side in the past, have also been fighting fiercely against each other. The Taliban, in summary, was one of these groups, and it had control over the country until the invasion by the so-called coalition forces in late 2001. Secondly, Pakistan has had a big shot in Afghanistan politics for a long time. Pakistan has played a key role, especially during the struggle against the Soviet invasion, housing both Afghani mujahedeen who were fighting against the Russians and millions of refugees escaping from Afghanistan. But more importantly, Pakistan has been a kind of base for weapons which have been transferred to Afghanistan and newcomers (future mujahedeen) from other Muslim countries. Besides Iran and other regional countries, the US and the UK are the primary power centers in the country. During and after the Russian invasion, these two countries have been directly or indirectly involved in the conflicts.
It can be claimed that for Afghanistan, a date that has been as significant as the Soviet invasion in 1979 is September 11, 2001, when suspected Al Qaeda members initiated coordinated terrorist attacks against several targets in the US. In October 2001, the US and the UK started the military operation (invasion), called Operation Enduring Freedom. The initial operation solely depended upon American and British forces, and eventually the so-called coalition forces were involved in the operation. The initial target of the operation was to dismantle the infrastructure of the Al Qaeda militants, but in time the target was widened to remove the Taliban regime from power in Afghanistan.
In 2003 however, Operation Enduring Freedom was completed and, with the support of the UN Security Council, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) was given control over the military presence of the coalition countries. The control of ISAF, then, was given to NATO. Currently there are more than 40 countries within the coalition forces, including Turkey.
Since the start of the operations the total military casualties for ISAF forces in Afganistan is 1141, including 682 American soldiers. It is obvious that the burden in Afghanistan is mostly on the American forces followed by the British.
The Effects of 9/11 on Pakistan-US Relations
During the military invasion in Afghanistan, Pakistan-US relations could be considered stable, until the US military expanded its operation to Pakistani territory. Struggling with the internal political turmoil, Pervez Musharraf, then the Head of the State in Pakistan, put himself in a razor edge situation. On the one hand he has been a dedicated ally of the US, particularly after the 9/11 attacks, and pledged full support to the US in its so-called “war on terrorism”. Pakistan even provided military bases to the US as well. On the other hand, when the things did not go well in Afghanistan at least in terms of dismantling the Al Qaeda elements, the US decided to initiate “targeted points operations (!)” on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and within the territory of Pakistan. Musharraf has faced fierce criticism from opposition groups in his country. He tried to distance himself from the US in such a way that while he attempted to secure his position in the country, at the same time he tried not to offend the US. Pakistan is still in a very difficult position in deciding what to do. Pakistan's current President Asif Ali Zardari is experiencing the same difficulty as his predecessor.
Afghanistan & Pakistan: Sharing the Same Destiny?
The significance of Afghanistan and Pakistan has multifaceted issues. First of all, the terrorism problem, which the world has been witnessing since 9/11, is manifested in Afghanistan. As mentioned at the beginning, the invasion of this country by the then-Soviet Union represents the first stage of today’s terrorism problem. In other words, as everybody knows, the seed of Al Qaeda was planted in Afghanistan. The initial stage did not involve just fighting against the Russian military. At that time communism was the enemy. However, the people who went to Afghanistan also learnt a life lesson of not only how to fight, but also the concept of the enemy. Mixed with the understanding of Salafism and Wahabism, regardless of the origins of these people, in a sense they have been painted with a kind of perception. It was not an ideology at the beginning, but this perception made these people not only warriors, but also ready-to-fight type of people even in situations where there has been no war.
The political climate in Afghanistan and Pakistan cannot be understood without the war of 1979-1989, because that period determined the current fragile social, political, economic, and cultural problems in both countries. While Afghanistan has already been under the impact of that period for a long time, the delayed tsunami impact has reached Pakistan with almost equal strength. It is not the refugee crisis which has emerged during the Soviet war or other catastrophic incidents. The Taliban life style or religious understanding has created a vacuum which now is starting to destroy the peaceful environment in Pakistan.
The problem in Pakistan has been worsened due to American military operations in the border area and within the territory of Pakistan. These cross-border operations strengthened the hard liners in the country.
At the same time Pakistan’s operations against Taliban elements in Pakistan exacerbated the political and social climate as well.
Of course the American perception, which perceives an offensive strategy as the only one to dismantle Al Qaeda elements, does not help Pakistan at all. Moreover, not only does this perception deteriorate the situation, it adds to the idea that Americans are to destroy the Muslims in the region and they will not stop until every Muslim is killed.
There are critical issues to be addressed. First of all the situation in Afghanistan is different than Iraq. To some extent, Iraqi people enjoyed the blessings of the modern world even at the time of Saddam Hussein’s regime. It is true that Iraqi people suffered greatly from two military invasions, one in 1991 and the last one in 2003. But it is also true that the devastation in Iraq is not as significant as in Afghanistan.
Second, the war or, if we will, the wars in Afghanistan has created something that has yet to emerge in Iraq, or at least we have not seen it there as we have in Afghanistan, and that is Afghanistan has become a platform. The platform provided people from several countries a land and a cause for which they could fight and die. In this platform some radical voices have not only identified themselves as warriors of a cause but they have also developed some kind of identity. That is why people from UK or any other European country could go to Pakistan and then Afghanistan to embed themselves in an identity of a cause.
Third, the so-called Taliban doctrine or understanding widened its area of activity, as well as operational territory, well beyond the borders of Pakistan. It is fare to say that the way Pakistan is handling the problem is helping neither Pakistan nor the people in tribal areas.
What Should the US Do?
The aforementioned issues are strongly related to the US and UK military operations in the region. And continuity of these operations will weaken the political strength of Pakistan. The situation in Pakistan may resemble that in Afghanistan but there is room for Pakistan to solve the problem before it becomes endemic. However it is the responsibility of the US to carefully handle the situation instead of considering the Pakistan issue as similar to the one in Afghanistan.
The US should focus more on infrastructure development, welfare policies and programs rather than military options in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The US should be more hesitant to directly engage in military operations in Pakistan; instead it can provide support to Pakistan in terms of equipment and other non-military implementations.
Obama should present his so-called constructive partnership with Pakistan as well. Otherwise his expected speech or new approach to the Middle East may be found quite inspiring in Egypt or in the Middle East, but it may not find an enthusiastic response from Central and South East Asia.
Countering radicalization in the world involves a long lasting process in which consistent policies should be implemented with comprehensive understanding of the issue. In other words, countries such as the US and the UK cannot be successful in fighting against radicalization when they use excessive force and kill innocent civilians and yet at the same time they propose change in their policies.
Closing Guantanamo can only be meaningful if the US engages with people through propositions focusing on their daily life problems, not with collateral damages caused by accidental air bombardment which killed hundreds of civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
One thing is clear: deterrence can exist in situations where a person has something to lose. When people do not have anything to lose then there will be no deterrence or ‘convincing’ people. In Afghanistan the trauma which has existed for decades has not left anything to lose. What the US should do is reconsider its policies in that region and try to approach the problem from a different angle.
We should never forget the fact that today’s terrorism problem has manifested itself in Afghanistan and at the minimum the ideological background of Al Qaeda is still strong in that region. If the US is trying to drain the bog instead of kill the mosquitoes, then it should not create new bogs.
NATO Summit: Is It The Way Forward for Rasmussen? 
